The aging Willingham Community Baths has sparked a furore in the town over what actions

should be taken. In the Voice, the town’s community newsletter, Willingham Council
despondently asserts their decision to close the Baths due to their significant financial
upkeep. Simultaneously, the Council, and the accompanying artist’s impression of the
proposal fervently put forward the benefits of the financially rewarding aquatic centre. Unlike
the Council, Roger Smiley, a local resident, spoke at a special Council meeting on behalf of
the citizen’s action group. In an impassioned yet heartfelt tone, laced with concern, Smiley
contends the need to protect the Baths due to their cultural significance rather than building
a centre which fails to benefit the majority of residents.

The Council begins by highlighting their connection to the Baths and depicting themselves
as advocates for their residents. From the outset, the Council establishes the profound
decision- making they have undergone through the “[struggle they had] with this decision for
some time”. Hence, by accentuating the extensive time they have spent thinking, and their
concomitant plight, the Council bolsters their love for the baths. Subsequently, through the
portrayal of the Council in a benevolent light, they are able to instill a sense of trust in local
residents, prompting the latter to view the Council as an inherently compassionate body with
the residents’ best interests at heart. Moreover, the discussion of “the full report [the Council]
commissioned looking into the viability of the baths” compounds the immense research they
conducted. Indeed, the verb “commissioned” alludes to the formality of this task, thus
nullifying concerned local residents’ doubt of the validity of the project. Need a concluding
sentence at the end of each paragraph?

The Council then accentuates the stark reality of the old, failing and unattractive Baths and
the end of an era. By outlining the key details of the report in dot point form, the Council
draws the residents’ attention to the pools’ “irreversible subsidence”, the “immediate repairs”
required to maintain “the pools and ageing buildings” and the “annual loss” the Baths incur.
The amalgamation of such descriptions not only highlights the dire state of the Baths, but
also elucidates the futility of repairing the pools given their immense financial burden.
Accordingly, financially oriented residents are compelled to recognise their efforts in saving
the Baths will not reap sufficient financial reward and instead, may result in an immense
financial toll on their precious town.

The Council moves onto highlight the benefits of constructing an aquatic centre instead of
keeping the Baths open. They juxtapose the financial consequences of the latter with the
economic benefits of the former. Likening the attempt to keep the Baths open as “simply
pouring money down the drawing”, the Council posits the immense waste of the town’s
resources. This idiom also exemplifies the inability for the town to recuperate from what the
Council paints as a foolish action. As a result, the Council invites the local residents
concerned about the frivolous spending to share their frustration in investing the town’s
limited resources to a useless act. Contrastingly, the Council underlines that the cost of
developing the aquatic centre will “significantly offset” the amount gained from selling the
Baths. The qualifier “significantly” amplifies the great amount of profit to be earned through
the aquatic centre’s construction. Hence, readers are coerced to look upon the centre
favourably due to its insurmountable financial merits, which will ultimately contribute
immensely to the town’s prosperity. The accompanying images corroborate this notion. The
modern design alludes to the long period of time during which the centre will add to the
town’s success. The residents may be returned to the deteriorating state of the Baths and
thus, recognise that the new building will undoubtedly be more financially advantageous to
the town. Moreover, the innumerable healthy-looking trees symbolise the way in which inner
Willingham will be “revitalise[d]” (can I use a quote i.e. what the Council said, to link it to the
image without analysing the quote itself?), as the Council asserts. Expecting the residents to
prioritise their town’s urban development overs saving a historical site, the artist predisposes
them to acknowledge the myriad of benefits the aquatic centre will bring for the town’s future.

In contrast, Smiley emphasises the importance of maintaining the town’s precious heritage.
The reference to this age through “I have lived all of my 76 years in Willingham” and the
“many times [he] spent at the Baths” spotlight the monumental role the pools played in his
life. Older residents, who have perhaps also spent a significant part of the life at the Baths,
are prompted to protect the Baths and to preserve any fond memories formed at the Baths.
Furthermore, Smiley highlights the role the Baths played in reversing the misconception that
residents “weren’t just the poor neighbours with dirt under our fingernails”. Through the
insinuation that they live in poverty, local residents may be antagonised at this untrue
depiction of themselves which tarnishes their reputation. This is coupled with the phrase
“and the Baths would sit there and remind everyone...forever”. The ellipsis before “forever”
accentuates the irony of demolishing the Baths which served as a constant reminder to
neighbouring towns to treat Willingham residents as equals, rather than poverty-stricken
individuals. Hence, through this appeal to pride, Smiley invites the residents to share his
indignation at the Council’s morally repugnant behaviour of destroying the Baths.

Smiley continues by arguing that the aquatic centre will be of no use to older residents. The
deliberate use of Meredith’s first name “Aldous” and the colloquial phrase “Aldous would be
turning in his grave if he knew someone planned to dig up our Baths” invites readers to view
themselves as having an intimate relationship with him. Thus, the former is challenged to
Meredith’s legacy and inclined to pay their respects, rather than object to the wishes of the
prominent figure who created the Baths. Moreover, the repetition of the single-worded
sentence “Fact.” lends truth to Smiley’s arguments. Readers are invited to regard the
subsequent sentences as the inherent truth, rather than contesting them. In addition, the
italicised “be able” in the declaration that pensioners “wouldn’t even be able to make [the]
journey from inner Willingham to the aquatic centre and italicised “new” in divulging that the
centre is for “new residents of Willingham” instils a sense of prejudice in residents who have
devoted their lives to the town. Hence, Smiley spurs indignant residents to castigate the
Council for creating a centre which will benefit an undeserving minority: the town’s new
residents. Moreover, the shift from the first-person singular pronoun “I” to the first-person
plural pronoun “we” and “our” in outlining the cultural and symbolic significance of the Baths
shifts the onus of the germane issue and responsibility onto the residents who have lived in
the town for decades. Consequently, Smiley encourages them to fulfil their common desire
of protecting their dear Baths.

In essence, the Council pressures readers to recognise the multitude of benefits- financial
and architectural, that the aquatic centre will bring to inner Willingham. Appealing to local
residents, but especially to those who have lived in the town for a long time, Smiley
vehemently disagrees with the Council. He attempts to condition readers to value the Baths
due to its prominence during their entire lives. Simultaneously, he coaxes vexed residents to
admonish the Council for their true priorities: attracting new residents, rather than protecting
old residents who have served the community for longer.
*prejudice/ inequity instead of unfairness